The benefit of fine art integration was greatest for Powers and smallest for Perimeter, a topic the authors note is already visual by nature¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The difference between control and experimental groups was largest in Powers and smallest in Perimeter; the authors attribute the smaller difference to Perimeter already being visual by nature. → Brezovnik 2015

Evidence¶

Brezovnik 2015¶

Brezovnik, A. (2015). The Benefits of Fine Art Integration into Mathematics in Primary School. c e p s Journal, 5(3). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1128967

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Authors' interpretation of the between-subject results across the four topics in the pedagogical experiment. The pattern held in both the full sample and the fine-art-mark-5 subgroup, with Powers largest and Perimeter smallest both times.

"We found the greatest difference in the fine art effect on mathematics between the control group and the experimental group in the topic Powers, and the smallest difference in Perimeter. The latter is a topic that is already visual by nature, which could explain the smaller difference in the mathematics test results."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Fifth-grade students taught mathematics with fine art integration achieved significantly higher scores on all four mathematics tests than students taught traditionally — related
• Students successful in fine art (previous-year mark of 5) who received art-integrated mathematics instruction outperformed equally successful fine art students taught traditionally on all four tests — a broader claim this one bears on